[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The GreatViews expressed here are not necessarily the views & opinions of ActivistChat.com. Comments are unmoderated. Abusive remarks may be deleted. ActivistChat.com retains the rights to all content/IP info in in this forum and may re-post content elsewhere.

As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, we are not enemies but friends. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.

And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn, I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices. I need your help. And I will be your president, too.

And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces, to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of the world, our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand.

To those -- to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security: We support you. And to all those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright: Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope.

That's the true genius of America: that America can change. Our union can be perfected. What we've already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

This election had many firsts and many stories that will be told for generations. But one that's on my mind tonight's about a woman who cast her ballot in Atlanta. She's a lot like the millions of others who stood in line to make their voice heard in this election except for one thing: Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old.

She was born just a generation past slavery; a time when there were no cars on the road or planes in the sky; when someone like her couldn't vote for two reasons -- because she was a woman and because of the color of her skin.

And tonight, I think about all that she's seen throughout her century in America -- the heartache and the hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we can't, and the people who pressed on with that American creed: Yes we can.

At a time when women's voices were silenced and their hopes dismissed, she lived to see them stand up and speak out and reach for the ballot. Yes we can.

When there was despair in the dust bowl and depression across the land, she saw a nation conquer fear itself with a New Deal, new jobs, a new sense of common purpose. Yes we can.

When the bombs fell on our harbor and tyranny threatened the world, she was there to witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved. Yes we can.

She was there for the buses in Montgomery, the hoses in Birmingham, a bridge in Selma, and a preacher from Atlanta who told a people that "We Shall Overcome." Yes we can.

A man touched down on the moon, a wall came down in Berlin, a world was connected by our own science and imagination.

And this year, in this election, she touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote, because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change.

Yes we can.

America, we have come so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves -- if our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see? What progress will we have made?

This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment.

This is our time, to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth, that, out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope. And where we are met with cynicism and doubts and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people: Yes, we can.

Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of

ActivistChat wrote:

Obama's Hero: Grandmother Madelyn Dunham (Toot) Is Very Impressive Lady With Good Deeds and Hard Work .....

Presidential hopeful Barack Obama, in 1979 gets a hug during his high school graduation in Hawaii from his maternal grandparents, Stanley Armour Dunham and Madelyn Payne, both natives of Kansas. (Photo courtesy Obama campaign)

Decision 2008 Priorities : U.S. Foreign and Energy Policy General Common Sense Expectations and Demands

We are the citizens of the United States of America who represent the majority of the American people who strongly adhere to the following beliefs:

1) We believe in the concept of complete secularism in government, which generally means complete separation of the State from religion, or any ideology or philosophy which can be interpreted as religious (e. g. Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islamism, Judaism, etc., or extreme ideologies such as Fascism or Communism). Secularism can be considered as common sense versus Ideology.

2) Democracy without secularism and secular parties cannot survive and continue a tradition of freedom of choice when a non-secular regime comes to power, as demonstrated by the Nazi party in Germany, the Khomeinist regime in Iran, and more recently by the Hamas Party in Palestine. This principle has been proven historically many times and in many countries.

3) When there is religious intervention in the affairs of the public and the State, then it become necessary to make public the fact that a religion or its precepts have influenced governmental institutions. It becomes a duty of citizens, in the interests of freedom, to work to remove that religious influence, and restore secular governance.

We believe that, in this century, real change starts with breakthroughs in less expensive and environmentally less-harmful energy sources such as hydrogen fuels, solar power, wind power, and geo-thermal energy, representing possibly safer alternatives to fossil fuels. The greatest changes for the better will be delivered by the world’s brilliant engineering minds, not politicians (Democrats or Republicans) who, for the past 40 years, have virtually ignored support for research in alternative sources of energy.

We recommend that support for qualified candidates for public office be based on past good deeds and public service, independent of political party affiliation or pre-assigned tags of left, center, right, liberal or conservative.

Our future expectations of policy makers and leaders with regard to foreign policy are defined by a new set of criteria based on test cases designed to be able to measure success and failure more objectively. Our recommended test cases and criteria are based on the vision of the founding fathers of the United States of America and those philosophies that informed them, including the works of Cyrus the Great, and Plato. We believe that this ancient and enduring spirit of freedom was embodied in the U.S. Constitution, and includes the following elements:

1- The implementation of a secular democracy
2- The implementation of enduring and inalienable Human/Women’s Rights
3- The implementation of a Free and Responsible Society
4- The promulgation of freedom and human rights at global level
5- The intent to gather moral and international support for the rejection of all religiously-based, gender-biased, racially-biased or apartheid, and ideologically extreme governments, realizing that these governments are a main source of creating fearful societies and terrorism in the world.

Independently of who is chosen for public office in the elections of 2008, we resolve to remain vigilant, and to continue to pressure elected officials to move in the aforementioned directions, to help assure a better future for all freedom-loving, secularist peoples. We will continue to make use of any communication media available to us in order to further this cause. The struggle toward a better future will not end with any one election, and we will always remember that only Truth, Honesty, and Integrity have survived, and will survive, the test of time and history.

Quick Overview of the Vision of Cyrus the Great:
Cyrus the Great, the father of first Human Rights declaration over 2500 years ago, advocated the abolition of slavery and ethnic or racial discrimination, freedom to choose one's place of residence, freedom of religious belief, and the establishment of peace among nations. Such ideas are still alive and are clearly esteemed by all those who believe in human dignity and human rights. The Persians regarded Cyrus The Great as The Father, the Babylonians regarded him as The Liberator, the Greeks called him the Law-Giver, and the Jews called him the Anointed of the Lord. Prof. Richard Frye of Harvard University is quoted as saying, “…Surely the concept of One World, and the fusion of peoples and cultures in one 'Oecumen', was one of [Cyrus the Great’s] important legacies”. Therefore, Cyrus the Great is considered to be one of the greatest political leaders and liberators of all time. October 29th has been designated as the international day of Cyrus the Great, king of Persia , who declared the first charter of human rights in the world, which is also known as the ‘Cyrus Cylinder’.

The Vision of the American Founding Fathers:
The founding fathers -- George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Adams -- are extraordinarily impressive revolutionary figures, with unique educational influences. Recent research by historians has found that Cyrus The Great’s Book by Xenophon, and ‘The Prince’ by Machiavelli, were required reading among the American Revolutionary Founding Fathers. Personal copies of these books owned by Founding Fathers exist in Library of Congress. The drafting of the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution was, however, more influenced by Cyrus The Great’s leadership and vision than Machiavelli. Cyrus The Great’s leadership vision is based on the ideas of a free society, human rights, sound moral values and a high code of ethics, versus the Machiavellian vision based on a fearful society, with perhaps immoral and unethical means advocated in order to control society. The American Founding Fathers were not essentially Machiavellian, and that is why they were able to create a great foundation upon which to build a nation.

We should try to find an answer to the following question: How could the founding fathers have achieved so much in such a short period of time, while current generations seemingly cannot achieve nearly as much, although endowed with far superior technological power and knowledge?

To safeguard our freedoms, we always remember James Madison’s famous statement: "If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself [italics ours]. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.” The Federalist No. 51 (James Madison).

Last edited by cyrus on Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:09 pm; edited 2 times in total

I wish I could speak this so well! fantastic!! Thank you for your insight on human and womens rights!!_________________Men that believe women are property to be handled as they see fit are ignorant, small minded fools!!

Obama will have many options on domestic policy given his majorities in Congress. But his Achilles’ heel, as it was for Bush and for many presidents, will be foreign policy. He has made what appear to be three guarantees. First, he will withdraw from Iraq . Second, he will focus on Afghanistan . Third, he will oppose Russian expansionism. To deliver on the first promise, he must deal with the Iranians. To deliver on the second, he must deal with the Taliban. To deliver on the third, he must deal with the Europeans.

Obama has promised to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq, where he does not intend to leave any residual force. If he follows that course, he will open the door for the Iranians. Iran’s primary national security interest is containing or dominating Iraq, with which Iran fought a long war. If the United States remains in Iraq , the Iranians will be forced to accept a neutral government in Iraq . A U.S. withdrawal will pave the way for the Iranians to use Iraqi proxies to create, at a minimum, an Iraqi government more heavily influenced by Iran .

Apart from upsetting Sunni and Kurdish allies of the United States in Iraq, the Iranian ascendancy in Iraq will disturb some major American allies — particularly the Saudis, who fear Iranian power. The United States can’t afford a scenario under which Iranian power is projected into the Saudi oil fields. While that might be an unlikely scenario, it carries catastrophic consequences. The Jordanians and possibly the Turks, also American allies, will pressure Obama not simply to withdraw. And, of course, the Israelis will want the United States to remain in place to block Iranian expansion. Resisting a coalition of Saudis and Israelis will not be easy.

This will be the point where Obama’s pledge to talk to the Iranians will become crucial. If he simply withdraws from Iraq without a solid understanding with Iran, the entire American coalition in the region will come apart. Obama has pledged to build coalitions, something that will be difficult in the Middle East if he withdraws from Iraq without ironclad Iranian guarantees. He therefore will talk to the Iranians. But what can Obama offer the Iranians that would induce them to forego their primary national security interest? It is difficult to imagine a U.S.-Iranian deal that is both mutually beneficial and enforceable.

Obama will then be forced to make a decision. He can withdraw from Iraq and suffer the geopolitical consequences while coming under fire from the substantial political right in the United States that he needs at least in part to bring into his coalition. Or, he can retain some force in Iraq , thereby disappointing his supporters. If he is clumsy, he could wind up under attack from the right for negotiating with the Iranians and from his own supporters for not withdrawing all U.S. forces from Iraq . His skills in foreign policy and domestic politics will be tested on this core question, and he undoubtedly will disappoint many.

I live in A part of the US that has remained democrat primarily for decades and know well that the challenges for my new President are daunting. I accept him as my president and I believe that he will be up to the task. If he surrounds himself with knowledgable and wise advisers there may be A viable solution to this "war crisis" created by G. Bush.
Iraq was illegally invaded by US forces and the whole mess, now more than five years old, has festered into A nightmare...we should not be there to begin with...
Your insite on this matter is wise. The fact that the US is in Iraq at all infuriates many peoples of many nations including many Americans. Leaving Iraq suddenly would be A great folly, greater than the initial invassion.
The Iraqi People must stand up and deal with this issue with greater effort or before it is all said and done the Iranian government will have their prize...Iraq herself!
Thank you for your post. I will share it with my friends and gather opinions.
With you sir, I agree!
James..._________________Men that believe women are property to be handled as they see fit are ignorant, small minded fools!!

Q: Senator, for the first time since the Iranian revolution, the president of Iran sent a congratulations note to a new U.S. president. I'm wondering if, first of all, if you responded to President (Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad's note of congratulations and, second of all, and more importantly, how soon do you plan on sending low-level envoys to countries such as Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, to see if a presidential-level talk would be productive?

OBAMA: I am aware that the letter was sent. Let me state ... repeat what I stated during the course of the campaign.

Iran's development of a nuclear weapon I believe is unacceptable. And we have to mount an international effort to prevent that from happening.

Iran's support of terrorist organizations I think is something that has to cease.

I will be reviewing the letter from President Ahmadinejad, and we will respond appropriately. It's only been three days since the election. Obviously, how we approach and deal with a country like Iran is not something that we should, you know, simply do in a knee-jerk fashion. I think we've got to think it through.

But I have to reiterate once again that we only have one president at a time. And I want to be very careful that we are sending the right signals to the world as a whole that I am not the president and I won't be until January 20th.

Q: You are now privy to a lot of intelligence that you haven't had access to before, in fact, much of what the president sees, I'm sure all of it.

First of all, do you — what do you think about the state of U.S. intelligence, whether you think it needs beefing up, whether you think there's enough interaction between the various agencies?

And, second of all, has anything that you've heard given you pause about anything you've talked about on the campaign trail?

OBAMA: Well, as you know, if ... if there was something I had heard, I couldn't tell you. But...

Q: (OFF-MIKE)

OBAMA: I have received intelligence briefings. And I will make just a general statement: Our intelligence process can always improve. I think it has gotten better. And, you know, beyond that, I don't think I should comment on the nature of the intelligence briefings. That was a two-parter. Was there another aspect to that?

Congratulations
On behalf of “PAIC” we would like to extend our congratulations to the President-elect Mr. Barack Obama. This historic event is a significant illustration of the American democracy at its best.
The Iranian community in the USA expects Mr. Obama to take effective steps in handling the Iranian regime’s threats in the Middle East by bringing the whole world together in order to neutralize Iran’s rulers’ ambitions to acquire the nuclear bomb, and to offset Islamic Republic’s lobbying influence in the USA.

Once again American relations with Iran is at a crossroad. With the election of a new president in the United States, time has come for a new page to be turned in the U S Iranian relations. It is a common knowledge that perhaps with the exception of Israel, Iran is the only country in the Middle East with the longest history of intense relations with America. In spite of what Ahmadinejad and his clan may claim, and despite thirty years of governmental anti-American propaganda, America and its institutions remain the idol and the ideal for most Iranians.

Americans effectively entered the Iranian diplomatic and political scene with World War II. At the end of that war when the Russians set up a puppet regime in the Iranian northern province of Azerbaijan (very similar to what they have just done in parts of Georgia) and refused to leave, it was President Truman who issued an ultimatum to Stalin that led to subsequent evacuation of Russian troops from the province and liberation of. Azerbaijan When in 1950 Iran recuperated its oil industry from the greedy British, the Americans initially supported Mossadegh's reformist government but unfortunately at the end, with the pretext of the Cold War exigencies, they ceded to the British pressures and contributed to the overthrow of Iran’s legitimate government.

In the sixties and the seventies, with the withdrawal of the British from the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, United States soon filled the vacuum, with Iran under the Shah, becoming the main U.S. ally. It was during this period that hundreds of thousands of young Iranians left their country to study in America. This was the beginning of what after the Revolution of 1979 became a flood of Iranians immigrating to America. During the same period, tens of thousands of young Americans moved to Iran in official private capacities. In spite of strong anti-American propaganda in Iran during the Cold War, anti-Americanism never grew its roots beyond the limit of the usual suspects into the Iranian masses. Even after almost thirty years of incessant government-sponsored propaganda, and poisonous Islamic invectives against the US, based on all surveys conducted, today America and the Americans are more popular among the young Iranians than anytime in history.

The new administration in America will assume office at a time when tens millions of Iranians inside, and millions of Iranians in Diaspora, at last have reached a consensus regarding the democratic future of their country with human rights and freedom for all. The heroic struggle of the Iranian women against barbaric attacks of the regime, the plight of poor who today constitute the majority in a country endowed with exceptional recourses is at stake.

The new administration can side with the people and their legitimate aspirations or choose to listen to the big-oil company lobbyists and connive with the present oppressive and dictatorial regime. We are well aware of the complexities of the situation in the region and the complications of nuclear threat. Appeasement of dictators has never led to peace and long-term stability. The present situation is no exception. Ignoring the question of human rights as the main item in any perceived negotiations with the Islamic regime will be an essential mistake for the new administration

“I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Martin Luther King, Jr. 1963

America is the greatest land of opportunity for women and blacks. Obama’s election is the most stunning event in history. The notion that if you’re black then you cannot be president is a myth in the United States of America. Nothing will put him down in the history books as much as his skin color and African Americans are proudly standing tall. Rightly so.

However as Larry Elder pointed out in a CNN pre-election interview, “this is not the civil rights movement. Though it is because of the success of the civil rights movement that Obama can have this opportunity. So we should rather focus on his proposed policies.” It is noteworthy to point out that Larry Elder is a prominent African-American personality.

Winning by 3% of the ballot, one questions whether this was a vote for Obama or a vote against the Bush administration? It has now been announced that Barack Obama will be reversing much of President Bush’s executive orders, such as with drilling and stem cell research. As time goes by we will steadily learn more. What his policy guidelines would be concerning countries such as Iran, is yet to be confirmed.

Many Iranians are keen to find out how the new President elect will fashion his foreign affairs protocol, particularly with their native country. We do know that throughout most of his campaigning he has championed engagement with such regimes and even shared his ideas on a “summit with Muslim countries in order to try and improve the United States’ image around the world.”

In response to a congratulatory letter from Ahmadinejad to the President-elect - the first of its kind to a U.S president since the 1979 Islamic revolution, Obama said that “Iran’s support for terrorist organizations has to cease and its suspected development of nuclear weapons was not acceptable.” Nonetheless Ahmadinejad has demonstrated his satisfaction for the election outcome. Unlike his hostile rhetoric of past, Ahmedinejad has also displayed the Islamic Republic’s new sense of security and a confidence that has not been expressed since Khomeini’s rule. The fact that there are troops in all the surrounding Emirates in the south of the Persian Gulf, such as Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar and, in central Asia, Afghanistan and Iraq, has given Iran’s Mullahs a fearful insecurity and a sense of being trapped in a pincer and thus have retaliated by trying to destabilize the Middle East in any way they can such as their support for Hamas, Hezbollah and insurgency in Iraq who have killed so many innocent Iraqi people and American allied troops.

One thing we can be sure of is that when it comes to foreign policy Obama will be faced with tough decisions. His flag for change has been something past Presidents have been working towards in one form or another, but perhaps when it comes to the guiding principles of foreign affairs a more fitting flag should be realism.

In its efforts to rapidly reverse much of the Bush administration’s policies, the new administration should move cautiously in order to ensure that it must serve the interests of America and avoid being enticed by what the President-elect wants to hear from such testing regimes, which only be in their interests. Such cat and mouse play has been exhausted by the U.N., USA and EU., with no results. The EU and UN, have been the voice of all three and have engaged with the Islamic Republic directly and indirectly to no avail. If anything, it has simply bought more precious time for the regime to build and facilitate its arsenal to full capability. You would just have to look at the regimes behavior during the last thirty years to appreciate that they have no intension at conceding.

There is no offer too good to refuse, that will convince them to discontinue their efforts. They believe its their right to join the union of nuclear countries and no matter how many more American presidents are elected to their liking, there is no proposal tempting enough to persuade them otherwise. The stakes are just too high for them. America has been the super power of the free world. The Islamic Republic wishes to be the super power of the Islamic world. If these ambitions come into fruition with full force then that will be a big game changer.

This is the reality.

So knowing this, then lessons should be taken from history to truly understand the accurate nature of the country, its rulers and perhaps more importantly the Iranian people and their background, who have quite a different standing from the Islamic Republic in Iran.

In Iran the most dynamic group are the young, who make up approximately 70% of the country’s nearly 70 million population. And they are hungry for freedom. The regime is fully aware of this fact and has shown its anxiety through heavy handed repression and mismanagement of the country.

It is inaccurately reported each and every single time that the country holds democratic parliamentary elections such as the free world is so accustomed to. Even though they may define it as such in the Islamic Republic’s national newspaper, spreading election rhetoric and slogans, which is in turn picked up by the western main stream media, they are far from traditional democratically held elections. A much more fitting explanation would be parliamentary selections. When candidates representing other parties are forbidden to campaign then it can hardly be termed as anything but a selection of the finest Islamic personalities by the Supreme Leader. It could be a hardliner or maybe a so-called reformist. It matters not as they do not govern any differently and the titles are just cosmetic. This is how the regime survives.

Unlike America’s awe-inspiring elections where many a presidents have come and gone, the Islamic Republics dogmatic system of rule has never given the Iranian people the opportunity to build their own future and thus are struggling to restore democracy, freedom and a secular regime in their sovereign country.

America is exalting in the fact that it truly is the land of free, where no matter what colour, gender, race or creed you have an abundance of opportunity to reach for the moon. This is the beauty of America. This is America’s truth, despite all of her critics who are consumed with jealousy. Even European pundits who have long labeled Americans as racist are now having to take a good hard look in the mirror.

So therefore any foreign policy that would welcome too hasty an engagement with the Islamic Republic would surely benefit the Mullahs the most, by unjustly giving them legitimacy as a de facto government. The people however, who dream for their country to once again have the same opportunities to blossom as America has would become even more isolated and pushed to the side once any idea of talks would commence. Not to mention that it would not be in the interests of America’s long term goals.

Of course being listed as a state sponsoring terrorism will continue to put the developed free world on the offensive.

If president elect Obama wishes to make any progress with the Iran issue then he should not put all his efforts on whether the Islamic Republic should not be allowed to pursue a nuclear arsenal but rather focus on the fact that if in its place there was a much more free, civilized, transparent, rational and secular government in Iran, that has respect for the most fundamental of human rights and long term ambitions to become an allied partner and join the democratic legion of countries, then there would not even be any notion of a threatening and dangerously hostile regime ready to push that little red button at the first sign of a quarrel.

Now that would be change.

Nicole Sadighi is a writer and fellow researcher for the Center for the Promotion of Democracy and Human Rights in Iran.

“If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” George Washington

I am not going to talk about how Mr. Obama stole the nomination from Hillary Clinton. I am not going to talk about widespread voter fraud involving Acorn in the Obama camp, both in the primaries and general election. I am not going to talk about how all the Obama's men either had influence in his life or helped him to his meteoric rise to power. I am not going to talk about Obama’s pre-paid Credit Card Fraud problem. I am not going to talk about how Radical Muslims paid Obama’s way through college. I am not going to talk about Obama's Middle East Studies Mentors. I am not going to talk about Obama's Voodoo Economics. I am not going to talk about the Logan Act when Mr. Obama did not speak responsibly when he went to Europe, Iraq and also a trip in 2006 to Kenya to meet with Odinga.
No, I am not going to talk about any of them, since none of those issues apparently mattered to those who voted for him. They elected him despite knowing those facts. So, I concede he won the election by receiving more votes than Senator McCain who seemed to desperately want to wrap things up and throw in the towel.

However, I am truly disturbed. I do want to talk about the fears that are rampantly mounting, concerning the question of Mr. Obama being a natural born U.S. citizen, as required by the Constitution, to run for the office of the presidency of the United States.

This issue led Philip J. Berg, a long time Democrat and attorney, to file suit against Barack H. Obama, challenging Senator Obama’s lack of "qualification" to serve as President of the United States. He filed a Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court on October 30, 2008, requesting a review of Judge Surrick's decision to dismiss his lawsuit against Barack H. Obama, Jr., the DNC and the other co-Defendants.

According to Berg, Obama is not eligible to be president. He says Obama was born in Kenya and he carries an Indonesian passport and became an Indonesian citizen when his stepfather adopted him while going to school in Indonesia. In addition, Mr. Obama's paternal grandmother in Kenya, has publicly stated that she attended his birth at a hospital in Mombosa, Kenya, in 1961.

Ironically, Linda Lingle, the Governor of Hawaii, issued an order to seal his birth records shortly after Mr. Obama’s recent trip to Hawaii. That begs the question: What is he hiding? Why not just open his records if there is nothing to hide? In an extraordinary gesture, the honorable U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick tossed out the suit claiming citizens do not have any standing to challenge the constitutionality of this issue.

"This is a question of who has standing to uphold our Constitution,” Berg said in a statement. “If I don’t have standing, if you don’t have standing, if your neighbor doesn’t have standing to question the eligibility of an individual to be President of the United States - the Commander-in-Chief, the most powerful person in the world - then who does? So, anyone can just claim to be eligible for congress or the presidency without having their legal status, age or citizenship questioned."

Berg argued, "We the people have no right to police the eligibility requirements under the U.S. Constitution? What happened to …Government of the people, by the people, for the people…?” Apparently Mr. Obama’s credential at Columbia University is SEALED. His year at Harvard is SEALED. His Certificate of Live Birth, or COLB (a COLB is a completely different document, one that can be registered much later than at the time of birth) is in the possession of the Hawaii Department of Public Health and is also SEALED.

Berg stressed the urgency of his case, arguing that “we” the people are heading to a "Constitutional Crisis" if this case is not resolved quickly.

Utah Senator, Orrin Hatch, once said, “Judges who take the law into their own hands, who make up constitutional 'rights' in order to strike down laws they oppose, undermine the people's right to have their values shape public policy and define the culture.” James Madison said, “The people are the only legitimate fountain of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, under which the several branches of government hold their power is derived.”

Freedom is a principle that must be applied indiscriminately. Once the constitutional laws are in place, they must be applied and practiced to their fullest. After living in America for 30 years, I have come to believe the Americans, of all people, understand the importance of a good, legal and sound constitutional framework as the foundation of political life.

Here is the question in the minds of many American citizens now: Is Barack Obama a United States Natural Born Citizen, and is he eligible to become the President of the United States, or did he present a forged government document to verify a citizenship he does not possess?

I am a recent "shareholder" in this magnificent "company" -- United States of America. The charter that lights the path of this country is the Constitution. I vehemently disagree with those who are more than willing to violate the Constitution and call it little more than a body of suggestions that can be disregarded when expedient. To me, the Constitution is our nation's most sacred document. It is the document that binds its vastly diverse constituents as equal loyal members.

I strongly feel that Mr. Obama and his supporters have not abided by the explicit provisions of the Constitution. For this reason, I am launching my protest and am demanding that the truth about Mr. Obama's eligibility to be the president of this great nation be conclusively established so that we can function as one nation and without the nagging question about Obama's eligibility that deeply troubles me and millions of my fellow Americans.

NEW Draft 03: What is Cyrus The Great International Rainbow Coalition pattern, concept, movement and framework?

Cyrus The Great Democratic Rainbow Coalition pattern and concept is a movement for social justice among people in United States, Iran, Israel, Greater Middle East, and Europe who they describe themselves as a political, cultural, non-governmental, non-parliamentary social movement whose goal is to affect the current public agenda with the aim of bringing a change into the societies as a whole and to its institutions… to implement values of secular democracy, free society, human rights, social justice, protecting environment, rejection of any form of slavery, equality of races and genders in multiculturalism. This unwritten global distributed network and decentralized organizations, with vast Internet social networks and communities around the globe are describing themselves as universal in its beliefs and open to all those who identify with its values in mother earth planet. This global movement enjoys popularity in Internet in many forms. Evolution of Cyrus The Great Democratic Rainbow Coalition will create new Union, when the critical mass movement and integration of forces occur then our Union will push Democratic governments around the globe to incorporate these values into their government foreign and domestic policies independent of their short term business interests.

Why this International Rainbow Coalition or Union pattern should be called after Cyrus the Great name? 1- Declared the first charter of human rights in the world over 2500 years ago, also known as the Cyrus Cylinder.
2- The Iranians regarded Cyrus the Great as The Father, the Babylonians as “The Liberator," the Jews as "The Anointed of The Lord," and the Greeks called him "The Law Giver". Reject any Religious, Ethnic cleansing or discrimination for creating division and partition.
3- In the past 2500 years of the history of Greater Middle East the only time that we have seen relative peace and prosperity was during Cyrus the Great and Achaemenid Empire era and some of the worst bloodshed and destruction happened after creation of Islam 1400 years ago.
4-

Larry Hedrick author and editor wrote:

Lessons in Ethical Leadership from an Epic Tale of Success, May 23, 2006 By Larry Hedrick author and editor
As the editor of "Xenophon's Cyrus the Great," I'd like to take this opportunity to tell you a little more about my version of this amazing ancient classic. The foremost management guru of recent times, Peter F. Drucker, read my manuscript before it was published, and he wrote this endorsement for use on its dust jacket: "'Xenophon's Cyrus,' the first book on the subject, is still the best book on leadership." Here's just a touch of background: Cyrus, the founder of the Persian empire, was an enlightened monarch who flourished 2,500 years ago. A century later, Xenophon of Athens so admired Cyrus' methods that he preserved them in history's first full-fledged treatment of wise and heroic leadership. This book presents its leadership lessons in the context of an epic story--the story of a vast power struggle. In narrating the events of Cyrus' life, Xenophon shows you, the reader, how to conduct meetings, become an expert negotiator, deal efficiently with allies, communicate by appealing to the self-interest of your followers, encourage the highest standards of performance, insure that your organization has the benefit of specialists, and prove that your words will be backed by your deeds. In recounting the achievements of Cyrus the Great, Xenophon wanted above all to provide lessons in ethical leadership, for he was convinced that honest, moral leaders succeed far more often than corrupt and evasive types. The result was a captivating leadership classic with unique qualities--a classic that's distinguished both by its suspenseful story line and the priceless advice that it offers to today's business professionals and leaders in all walks of life.

The following Iranian petitions that were matching Cyrus The Great Democratic Rainbow Coalition pattern, concept, principles and framework might be considered as best example.

Quote:

2008 Freedom-Loving Americans Expectations wrote:

U.S. Foreign and Energy Policy General Common Sense Expectations and Demands

We are the citizens of the United States of America who represent the majority of the American people who strongly adhere to the following beliefs:

1) We believe in the concept of complete secularism in government, which generally means complete separation of the State from religion, or any ideology or philosophy which can be interpreted as religious (e. g. Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islamism, Judaism, etc., or extreme ideologies such as Fascism or Communism). Secularism can be considered as common sense versus Ideology.

2) Democracy without secularism and secular parties cannot survive and continue a tradition of freedom of choice when a non-secular regime comes to power, as demonstrated by the Nazi party in Germany, the Khomeinist regime in Iran, and more recently by the Hamas Party in Palestine. This principle has been proven historically many times and in many countries.

3) When there is religious intervention in the affairs of the public and the State, then it become necessary to make public the fact that a religion or its precepts have influenced governmental institutions. It becomes a duty of citizens, in the interests of freedom, to work to remove that religious influence, and restore secular governance.

We believe that, in this century, real change starts with breakthroughs in less expensive and environmentally less-harmful energy sources such as hydrogen fuels, solar power, wind power, and geo-thermal energy, representing possibly safer alternatives to fossil fuels. The greatest changes for the better will be delivered by the world’s brilliant engineering minds, not politicians (Democrats or Republicans) who, for the past 40 years, have virtually ignored support for research in alternative sources of energy.

We recommend that support for qualified candidates for public office be based on past good deeds and public service, independent of political party affiliation or pre-assigned tags of left, center, right, liberal or conservative.

Our future expectations of policy makers and leaders with regard to foreign policy are defined by a new set of criteria based on test cases designed to be able to measure success and failure more objectively. Our recommended test cases and criteria are based on the vision of the founding fathers of the United States of America and those philosophies that informed them, including the works of Cyrus the Great, and Plato. We believe that this ancient and enduring spirit of freedom was embodied in the U.S. Constitution, and includes the following elements:

1- The implementation of a secular democracy
2- The implementation of enduring and inalienable Human/Women’s Rights
3- The implementation of a Free and Responsible Society
4- The promulgation of freedom and human rights at global level
5- The intent to gather moral and international support for the rejection of all religiously-based, gender-biased, racially-biased or apartheid, and ideologically extreme governments, realizing that these governments are a main source of creating fearful societies and terrorism in the world.

Independently of who is chosen for public office in the elections of 2008, we resolve to remain vigilant, and to continue to pressure elected officials to move in the aforementioned directions, to help assure a better future for all freedom-loving, secularist peoples. We will continue to make use of any communication media available to us in order to further this cause. The struggle toward a better future will not end with any one election, and we will always remember that only Truth, Honesty, and Integrity have survived, and will survive, the test of time and history.

Quick Overview of the Vision of Cyrus the Great:
Cyrus the Great, the father of first Human Rights declaration over 2500 years ago, advocated the abolition of slavery and ethnic or racial discrimination, freedom to choose one's place of residence, freedom of religious belief, and the establishment of peace among nations. Such ideas are still alive and are clearly esteemed by all those who believe in human dignity and human rights. The Persians regarded Cyrus The Great as The Father, the Babylonians regarded him as The Liberator, the Greeks called him the Law-Giver, and the Jews called him the Anointed of the Lord. Prof. Richard Frye of Harvard University is quoted as saying, “…Surely the concept of One World, and the fusion of peoples and cultures in one 'Oecumen', was one of [Cyrus the Great’s] important legacies”. Therefore, Cyrus the Great is considered to be one of the greatest political leaders and liberators of all time. October 29th has been designated as the international day of Cyrus the Great, king of Persia , who declared the first charter of human rights in the world, which is also known as the ‘Cyrus Cylinder’.

The Vision of the American Founding Fathers:
The founding fathers -- George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Adams -- are extraordinarily impressive revolutionary figures, with unique educational influences. Recent research by historians has found that Cyrus The Great’s Book by Xenophon, and ‘The Prince’ by Machiavelli, were required reading among the American Revolutionary Founding Fathers. Personal copies of these books owned by Founding Fathers exist in Library of Congress. The drafting of the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution was, however, more influenced by Cyrus The Great’s leadership and vision than Machiavelli. Cyrus The Great’s leadership vision is based on the ideas of a free society, human rights, sound moral values and a high code of ethics, versus the Machiavellian vision based on a fearful society, with perhaps immoral and unethical means advocated in order to control society. The American Founding Fathers were not essentially Machiavellian, and that is why they were able to create a great foundation upon which to build a nation.

We should try to find an answer to the following question: How could the founding fathers have achieved so much in such a short period of time, while current generations seemingly cannot achieve nearly as much, although endowed with far superior technological power and knowledge?

To safeguard our freedoms, we always remember James Madison’s famous statement: "If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself [italics ours]. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.” The Federalist No. 51 (James Madison).

SINCE Barack Obama's victory, the concept of "talking to Iran" has be come Washington's flavor of the month.

Talking to Iran, of course, was one of candidate Obama's main foreign-policy planks. It sounded both intelligent and attractive. After all, if one could achieve all those desirable results just by talking to the mullahs, why not?

There's a hitch, however.

Obama appears to be having second thoughts about the wisdom of an idea announced largely as a means of strengthening his anti-Bush message rather than dealing with a dangerous foreign foe. All indications from him since his election are that he's in no hurry to open talks.

The other day, in response to a cable from President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad congratulating him on his win, Obama indicated he was in no mood to accept the Iranian's invitation to dance - for several reasons.

To start with, he has realized that his offer of unconditional talks with Tehran could destroy the six-nation coalition that has managed to pass three United Nations Security Council resolutions imposing sanctions on the Islamic Republic. Some allies, including France, have issued direct warnings that Obama's campaign promise may encourage Iran to speed up its nuclear program. Israel's Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, for her part, has indicated "deep reservations" about Obama's Iran gambit.

More important, perhaps, with the election over, Obama remembers that talking to the mullahs is nothing new. First launched by West German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher in 1980, it has been tried by the European Union, successive US administrations and several Arab countries for a quarter of a century - producing nothing but grief. Genscher ended up describing the Khomeinist regime as a trap whose embrace is best avoided.

To be sure, Obama can't suddenly declare that he no longer wants direct, unconditional talks. That would enrage his anti-war base. So, he is trying to bring the camel down from the roof, as the Persian proverb has it, without appearing to have made a U-turn.

Obama no longer talks of "meeting them anywhere, anytime." Instead, he speaks of engaging Iran "at a time and place of my choosing." His initial idea of talking to Ahmadinejad is also gone. Now, he says he'd talk to "appropriate Iranian leadership" (whatever that means).

Clearly, he has toned down the concept of "unconditional talks." He talks of "careful preparations," while his advisers say that he won't seek talks with Tehran until after the Iranian presidential election next summer. The idea is to deny Ahmadinejad a breakthrough with America that would bolster his re-election bid.

That Obama is rethinking his rash idea of unconditional talks with Tehran, even if that means alienating key allies, is a welcome development. His assertion that the Iranian problem can't be solved with "a knee-jerk reaction" is also welcome. Nevertheless, if the alternative is doing nothing, the new Obama position may prove more dangerous than the one he's trying to abandon.

That's because the clock is running out on those who wish to prevent the mullahs from building a nuclear arsenal. Last month, the International Atomic Energy Agency warned that Iran has speeded up its nuclear program. The IAEA says that Iran, in "a covert bid to expand its nuclear program, recently tested ways of retrieving highly enriched uranium from waste-reactor fuels."

Most experts agree that "the moment of truth" in Iran's nuclear standoff with the UN is likely to come during Obama's presidency - probably in 2010 or 2011. Unless Obama manages to stop the process before that, he could end up facing nuclear-armed mullahs. Then, the choice would be between acknowledging a fait accompli and using force to change it.

Obama urgently needs a credible policy for dealing with the Khomeinist threat. No one is asking for a knee-jerk reaction. But buying time (the mullahs' specialty) is no alternative, either.

Amir Taheri's latest book, "The Persian Night: Iran Under the Khomeinist Revolution," is due out this month.

Due to the following reasons:
- The USA voters were divided
- the country is facing strategic inflection point
- major Domestic , Foreign and Defense challenges
- there is a need for change in many areas

As a result of above reasons the Rainbow Coalition model might be the best choice for President-elect Obama and country if he can attract Senator Hillary Clinton for State Dept. Secretary and Senator McCain for Defense Dept. Secretary and President-elect Obama focuses his time on domestic issues, economy and investing on alternative fossil fuel energy research and development.
This kind of Rainbow Coalition team might be able to resolve difficult issues that the country is facing in next 4 years.

November 14, 2008
Could a plum spot in Barack Obama's administration be in the offing for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Several news outlets reported last night that the New York senator was under consideration for secretary of state. The outlets all quoted unnamed Obama advisers.

The Clinton camp refused to comment on the possibility. Senior adviser Philippe Reines said: "Any speculation about cabinet or other administration appointments is really for President-elect Obama's transition team to address."

Throughout the Democratic primaries, Obama criticized Clinton's judgment in backing the war in Iraq. Many other names have been mentioned for the top diplomat job, including Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, former Georgia Democratic Sen. Sam Nunn, and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.).

CHICAGO (Reuters) - President-elect Barack Obama will meet with his former rival, Republican Sen. John McCain, on Monday to talk about ways they can work together, an Obama spokeswoman said on Friday.

The meeting between the former competitors will take place in Chicago at Obama's transition headquarters two weeks after the Democratic senator won a decisive victory over McCain in the November 4 election.

It will be the first time the two have spoken since McCain called Obama to concede the election. McCain gave an emotional speech after the concession in which he promised to help his former rival address the country's many challenges.

Due to the following reasons:
- The USA voters were divided
- the country is facing strategic inflection point
- major Domestic , Foreign and Defense challenges
- there is a need for change in many areas

As a result of above reasons the Rainbow Coalition model might be the best choice for President-elect Obama and country if he can attract Senator Hillary Clinton for State Dept. Secretary and Senator McCain for Defense Dept. Secretary and President-elect Obama focuses his time on domestic issues, economy and investing on alternative fossil fuel energy research and development.
This kind of Rainbow Coalition team might be able to resolve difficult issues that the country is facing in next 4 years.

November 14, 2008
Could a plum spot in Barack Obama's administration be in the offing for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Several news outlets reported last night that the New York senator was under consideration for secretary of state. The outlets all quoted unnamed Obama advisers.

The Clinton camp refused to comment on the possibility. Senior adviser Philippe Reines said: "Any speculation about cabinet or other administration appointments is really for President-elect Obama's transition team to address."

Throughout the Democratic primaries, Obama criticized Clinton's judgment in backing the war in Iraq. Many other names have been mentioned for the top diplomat job, including Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, former Georgia Democratic Sen. Sam Nunn, and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.).

CHICAGO (Reuters) - President-elect Barack Obama will meet with his former rival, Republican Sen. John McCain, on Monday to talk about ways they can work together, an Obama spokeswoman said on Friday.

The meeting between the former competitors will take place in Chicago at Obama's transition headquarters two weeks after the Democratic senator won a decisive victory over McCain in the November 4 election.

It will be the first time the two have spoken since McCain called Obama to concede the election. McCain gave an emotional speech after the concession in which he promised to help his former rival address the country's many challenges.

Nov. 16 (Bloomberg) -- Henry Kissinger said Hillary Clinton, frontrunner to be the next U.S. Secretary of State, would be an ``outstanding'' appointment to the post.

New York Senator Hillary Clinton appears to be President- elect Barack Obama's leading choice for secretary of state, according to a Democrat familiar with the matter.

``She is a lady of great intelligence, demonstrated enormous determination and would be an outstanding appointment,'' Kissinger, who served as secretary of state from 1973 to 1977 under presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, told the World Economic Forum's India Economic Summit in New Delhi today.